12
Written evidence from the UK Open Government Network [CCI0071]
1.0 Introduction
1.1 About Us
1.2 Purpose of this Submission
2.0 Assessments of Community Cohesion in the UK
3.0 Primary Barriers and Threats to Community Cohesion; Impact of Social Media; and local / national actions.
3.1 Lack of Trust in Government and Institutions
3.2 Exclusion from Decision-Making
3.3 Misinformation and Social Media Polarisation
3.4 Lack of Transparency and Accountability in Public Spending
3.5 Funding of Local Authorities and Grassroots Initiatives
4.0 Examples of Best Practice Positively Impacting Community Cohesion
4.1 Participatory Democracy and Community Decision-Making
4.2 Open Data and Transparency Initiatives
4.3 Tackling Misinformation and Digital Polarisation
4.4 Community-Led Digital Resilience
5.0 Conclusion
1.0 Introduction
1.1 About Us
The UK Open Government Network (UK OGN) is a coalition of civil society organisations dedicated to fostering trust through open government, defined by the OECD as a culture of transparency, integrity, accountability, and stakeholder participation.
For over a decade, the UK OGN has worked with the UK government predominantly through the Cabinet Office, to produce open government plans. This is part of the 77-country Open Government Partnership (OGP) - a multilateral initiative, launched in 2011 by the then US President Barack Obama with the UK as a founding member.
The Scottish and Northern Ireland governments, Glasgow City Council and Greater Manchester Combined Authority have since joined OGP as ‘local’ members.
OGP is a model of co-creation that has established structures, governance, and independent oversight, and has led to major reforms, including:
● The UK being the first in the G20 to introduce a register of beneficial ownership to combat illicit finance
● The UK being the first in the G20 to adopt the Open Contracting Data Standard, for transparency in procurement
● The development of the world’s first algorithmic transparency standard.
1.2 The purpose of this submission.
The purpose of this submission is three-fold.
First to contribute evidence to support the Inquiry including from the Open Government Partnership and the OECD. Second, to raise the profile of existing cross-departmental government and civil society partnerships and structures which could potentially support the delivery of the Inquiry’s outcomes. Third, to promote the involvement of civil society and the wider community in the development of responses to community cohesion. There are extensive civil networks who could further support this inquiry but who could not be consulted due to time constraints, but would welcome engagement at a later stage.
This includes:
2.0 What assessments have been made of community cohesion in the UK in a local and national context?
2.1 The Khan review (Chpt 6) highlights that ‘trust in the democratic processes, politicians and democratic participation are important indicators of social cohesion’ and that there are clear links between ‘trust in politics and feelings of societal belonging.’
2.2 Popular assessments of trust in the UK include:
- OECD Survey on Drivers in Trust In Public Institutions which includes results relating to the UK.
- British Social Attitudes report from the National Centre for Social Research (NATCEN)
- The Edelman Trust Barometer UK
- The Office for National Statistics ‘Trust in Government’ survey
3.0 What are the primary barriers and threats to community cohesion, what impact does social media have on community cohesion, and what can be done at a local and national level to improve community cohesion?
Open government and the principles of transparency, accountability and participatory policy, play a crucial role in determining the strength of community cohesion. A lack of openness in government decision-making, public spending, and institutional accountability fosters distrust, misinformation, and exclusion, all of which undermine social cohesion. Below are the primary barriers and threats to community cohesion, with a focus on transparency and evidence from key sources.
3.1 Lack of Trust in Government and Institutions
● The National Centre for Social Research (NATCEN) 41st Social Attitudes Report revealed that a record high of 45% of UK citizens don’t trust governments, of any party, to put their needs first.
● The OECD (2023) found that 44% of people express low or no trust in their government.
● The Edelman Trust Barometer (2024 UK Report) found that trust in the UK government and media had dropped to 30% and 31% respectively - the lowest in a decade.
3.2. Exclusion from Decision-Making
● The Khan Review (2024) (Chpt 6) found that deliberative democracy fosters inclusion and resilience. However, these methods are not systematically implemented in the UK.
● Citizens’ White Paper (Demos / Involve, 2024): Argues that participatory governance reduces exclusion and calls for greater transparency in community engagement strategies.
● Transitioning from sporadic events to enduring rights and opportunities for citizens to engage;
● Improving the quality of participation by equipping institutions with the skills and resources to design and execute fit-for-purpose, innovative, and inclusive engagement processes;
● Enhancing the impact of participation through clear connections between public input and decision-making processes, potentially even delegating decision-making authority to citizens;
● Ensuring consistency in participation through the adoption of best practices across government agencies and sectors, fostering a coherent whole-of-government approach to public participation at all levels. In particular, ensure that the relationship between participation activities and legislative or administrative decisions is clear and understood, rather than ad hoc.
3.3 Misinformation and Social Media Polarisation
● Khan Review (2024) (Chapter 6): Highlights that misinformation disproportionately affects marginalised communities, increasing social tensions.
● OECD Truth Quest Survey (2024) found that individuals are only 60% accurate in identifying misinformation, and that trust in social media is at an all-time low (57%).
● OECD research also identifies that mis and disinformation ‘can contribute to polarisation, jeopardise the implementation of policies, and undermine trust in democratic institutions and processes.’ It states that ‘Governments must explore the constructive roles they can play in reinforcing the integrity of the information space through implementing policies to enhance the transparency, accountability, and plurality of information sources, including traditional media and online platforms. This includes promoting regulatory efforts, as applicable, to promote media pluralism and independence, as well as to encourage the accountability and transparency of online platforms by gathering more information on risks, management processes, algorithms, and data flows. Governments should also upgrade their institutional architecture, including through putting in place coordination mechanisms, strategic frameworks, and capacity-building programmes that support a coherent vision and approach to strengthening information integrity within the public administration.’
● Ensure there is a robust evidence base to assess levels of misinformation and polarisation. Evidence from the OECD shows ‘that perceived ability to identify false and misleading content online is uncorrelated with measured ability, calling into question the use of perception surveys in this area.’
● Media, digital, and civic literacy should seek to empower individuals to cultivate critical thinking skills and to identify and counter the spread of false and misleading information.’ The Open government Partnership encourages governments to introduce policies to tackle disinformation and misuse of social media platforms and implement government programs that build capacities of citizens to increase media literacy. It makes particular reference to The European Digital Media Observatory, an established hub for relevant stakeholders to conduct fact-checking activities and coordinate research on disinformation at the European level.
● The Open Government Partnership also cites the following examples of countries who have developed reforms through OGP:
- AUSTRALIA: Outreach Campaign to Improve Media Literacy: Committed to funding outreach programs to improve the media literacy of culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) communities, especially those that are vulnerable to misinformation and disinformation. This includes training for public servants to better understand the media habits, resources, and influencers in CALD communities.
- FRANCE: Awareness Campaign to Prevent Misinformation: Committed to designing an awareness campaign on disinformation and cybercrime, developing a public communications plan (with best practices and warnings), and holding public debates with experts on information manipulation in 2024. This builds on earlier efforts within OGP to convene experts across sectors on how to counter information manipulation.
- FINLAND: Open Data to Combat Misinformation: Committed to hosting intersectoral dialogues on appropriately opening and sharing data during exceptional security situations. Finland is given as an example, through its development of a media literacy module that helps school-age individuals distinguish fake news based on three categories: misinformation, disinformation, and malinformation.
- GHANA: Regulations to Implement Media Literacy Law: Committed to collaborating with civil society in a working group to conduct a human rights assessment of existing legislation on misinformation and disinformation while protecting free speech. The working group also implements fact-checking, media literacy, and public education initiatives.
- INDONESIA: Public Oversight of Elections: Committed to establishing a public monitoring body to oversee elections and counter disinformation.
● The OECD also recommends the promotion of a diverse and independent media and quality journalism: ‘Freedom of expression, media independence, and access to information are the cornerstones of democracy. A diverse, pluralistic and independent media sector, with an emphasis on local journalism, plays a key role as a watchdog for the public interest, helping to curb disinformation and hold state and non-state actors to account.’
● Digital Participation Platforms as a countermeasure: Public engagement platforms, like Polis, demonstrate the potential of online deliberation to counteract polarisation.
● Regulation: Review provisions in the Online Safety Act, aspects of which were criticised following the UK riots of 2024.
3.4. Lack of Transparency and accountability in Public Spending
● Khan Review (2024) (Chapter 6): Found that many local councils lack financial transparency, leading to public frustration over unfulfilled cohesion initiatives.
● The Open Government Partnership has significant examples of governments around the world who publish real-time budget allocations projects, ensuring community oversight and trust in spending. Budget transparency is part of OGP’s eligibility requirements, and fiscal openness as a whole is the most popular policy area among members.
- SCOTLAND: Review Process for Spending Plans: Implemented several reforms related to budget transparency, particularly creating a Spending Review Framework that sets criteria for future spending plans through dialogues between actors such as parliamentary committees, government officials, and public bodies.
- CÔTE D’IVOIRE: Online Citizens Budget: Uploads an annual Citizens Budget online starting in 2019 to explain the budget process to the public. Newer versions of the budget also set desired results for expenditures rather than only focusing on expenses incurred. Also committed to institutionalizing participatory budgeting practices at the local level.
- FINLAND: Spending Transparency on the Public Procurement Portal: Expanded its public procurement portal to include spending in near-real time, which can be sorted by government agency (known as “administrative branches”).
- LITHUANIA: Municipal Finance Data Portal: Created a data portal for all municipalities in the country related to state and local revenue and expenses, debts, and unemployment, as well as national budget details. The portal also includes public and private recipients of public funding and the use of tax revenue.
- MONTENEGRO: Debt Transparency Commitment: Committed to making data on local governments’ revenues, expenditures, and tax debts more transparent, particularly in an open data format.
- NORTH MACEDONIA: Open Finance Data Portal: Launched a database on budget expenditures in 2019 for institutions administered under the Treasury, which media organisations have already begun to access for investigative reporting.
- URUGUAY: Public Feedback on Budget Transparency: Conducted several consultations with users of the budget transparency portal and incorporated feedback, such as adding new content, revising existing content to be more readable, improving the search function, and ensuring that data is published according to the Open Fiscal Data Package.
● The Local Government Association’s Building Cohesive Communities Report (2019) calls for councils to adopt open budget models to demonstrate how cohesion initiatives are resourced.
● Implement open contracting and open budgeting. budgeting tracking for all publicly funded cohesion initiatives, ensuring citizen oversight.
● Research initiatives such as participatory budgeting (PB). in Scotland, Local Authorities and the Scottish Government worked together to develop and agree a framework whereby at least 1% of local government budgets will be subject to participatory budgeting. It establishes a shared expectation that elected members, senior officers, civil society and local communities will use PB to go beyond the current arrangements for consultation and engagement.
3.5. Funding of Local Authorities and Grassroots Initiatives
● Khan Review (2024) (Chapter 6): Found that local councils lack funding, expertise, and strategic frameworks to manage community cohesion effectively.
● OECD Open Government Index (2023): Highlights that funding transparency and participatory budgeting models improve social integration outcomes.
4.0 Examples of Best Practice Positively Impacting Community Cohesion
Community cohesion is strengthened by participatory governance, inclusive policy making, and open government initiatives. Best practices from across the UK and internationally demonstrate how transparency, accountability, citizen engagement, and local leadership can foster social trust, reduce polarization, and empower communities. Below are key examples of initiatives that have successfully improved community cohesion.
4.1 Participatory Democracy and Community Decision-Making
a) Citizens’ Assemblies and Deliberative Democracy
● Best Practice: Ireland’s Citizens’ Assembly on Abortion (2016-2018). Impact: This deliberative democracy process brought together 100 randomly selected citizens to discuss abortion law reform. The Assembly made evidence-based recommendations, which led to a referendum that successfully changed the law. Why It Works: Structured deliberation builds trust by ensuring diverse voices are heard in policymaking, reducing societal division on complex issues.
● UK Example: Citizens’ Jury on assisted dying. The Jury was an opportunity for a diverse group of 30 residents in England, from different walks of life, to learn about and discuss the complexities relevant to assisted dying. The jury concluded with a significant majority advocating for a change in the law to permit assisted dying for terminally ill, mentally competent adults. This recommendation has influenced ongoing legislative discussions. In October 2024, MP Kim Leadbeater introduced the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, proposing to legalise assisted dying for terminally ill adults in England and Wales. The bill has progressed through parliamentary stages, including a second reading in November 2024, where it garnered significant attention and debate.
b) Participatory Budgeting
● Best Practice: Brazil’s Porto Alegre Model of Participatory Budgeting Impact: Over 50,000 citizens participate annually in allocating municipal budgets, prioritizing local infrastructure, education, and health services. Why It Works: Direct public participation in budget allocation increases trust in local government and ensures equitable service distribution.
● UK Example: Scotland’s Participatory Budgeting (PB) programme (2016-2018) enabled residents to decide how public funds were spent, promoting community-led decision-making. Supported by the Scottish Government, it was implemented by local authorities and civil society groups, focusing on social inclusion, youth engagement, and local development. Impact: Increased Community Engagement, Strengthened Social Cohesion, Improved Trust in Local Government, Enhanced transparency in public spending. Long-Term Influence: Led to a government commitment that at least 1% of local authority budgets be allocated through PB.
4.2. Open Data and Transparency Initiatives
a) Open Contracting and Public Service Monitoring
● Best Practice: Ukraine’s ProZorro Open Contracting System. Impact: This open data procurement system allows citizens to track government spending and reduce corruption. Why It Works: Public transparency enhances accountability, builds trust, and reduces social grievances over public spending.
● UK Example: London’s Open Data Strategy. Impact: Public dashboards provide real-time data on crime, transport, and public services, enabling citizens to scrutinize policies and hold officials accountable.
b) Community-Led Public Data Monitoring
● Best Practice: Estonia’s Online Policy Co-Creation Platform. Impact: Citizens can track legislative changes and submit real-time feedback on proposed policies. OECD Endorsement: Recognised as a global model for transparent policymaking.
● UK Example: Connected by Data Initiative. Impact: Advocates for greater transparency in public data governance, ensuring communities are empowered in decision-making on digital rights and privacy.
4.3. Tackling Misinformation and Digital Polarisation
● Algorithmic Transparency and Online Safety. Best Practice: Canada’s Algorithmic Transparency Initiative. Impact: Requires government agencies to disclose how AI and algorithms make decisions. Why It Works: Improves trust in government digital tools and prevents algorithmic bias.
● UK Example: Online Safety Act (2023). Impact: Places a duty of care on social media platforms to mitigate harmful online content. Current Limitations: Critics argue that the Act lacks explicit measures against misinformation and call for stronger regulation.
4.4 Community-Led Digital Resilience
● Best Practice: Finland’s Media Literacy and Disinformation Awareness Curriculum. Impact: Introduces fact-checking education in schools to combat misinformation. OECD Recognition: Endorsed as a leading approach to tackling digital misinformation.
● UK Example: BBC’s Reality Check and Full Fact’s Fact-Checking Network. Impact: Provides verified information to counteract social media misinformation
5.0 Conclusion
This submission highlights the essential role that transparency, accountability and participation plays in fostering community cohesion. The evidence presented underscores that mistrust in government, exclusion from decision-making, misinformation, lack of financial accountability, and underfunding of local authorities are key barriers that must be addressed.
It is hoped this document serves as the beginning of a process of further engagement between relevant civil society and government teams, currently collaborating on open government, to assist with efforts to:
● Strengthen participatory policymaking at both local and national levels by expanding citizens’ assemblies, participatory budgeting, and open consultation mechanisms.
● Enhance transparency in government cohesion initiatives by requiring open data reporting on policy impacts, spending, and local cohesion strategies.
● Combat misinformation by regulating digital platforms, increasing algorithmic transparency, and investing in public media literacy initiatives.
● Invest in digital and deliberative democracy to counteract social polarisation and build trust in governance.
● Embed civic participation in education through initiatives that promote digital literacy, misinformation awareness, and youth engagement in governance.
● Implement financial transparency and participatory budgeting for all publicly funded cohesion initiatives, ensuring that spending decisions reflect public needs and priorities.
We look forward to working with you further.
February 2025